2. Dean Richards

3.  Understand how the RTI system improves our current practices ◦ Improving outcomes for all students  Systematic process  Intervene early  Provide tailored instruction to need ◦ Improving our identification and instruction of students who may have a Specific Learning Disability  Review traditional special education evaluation system  Review RTI evaluation system ◦ Improve parents understanding of their child’s skills

4.  To increase the achievement for all students  To better identify and instruct students who may have a learning disability  To help parents be better informed about their child’s skills

5. Is NotIs An instructional programA framework to implement effective practices Intended to encourage placement of students Matching needs and resources Possible to implement aloneA collaborative effort The same for every schoolUniquely designed for each building A special education, a general education, a Title 1, a Talented and Gifted initiative An “Every” Education Initiative An educational fadA systematic method for delivering instruction

6.  Builds a unified (collaborative) system  Identifies students who need help early  It helps students receive instruction that they need

7.  Builds a unified (collaborative) system  Identifies students who need help early  It helps students receive instruction that they need

8. Our education system has grown up through a process of “Disjointed Incrementalism” (Reynolds, 1988) The current Education System’s Programmatic Evolution K-12 Education Gifted Title 1 SPED Migrant ELL At Risk

9.  Conflicting programs  Conflicting funding streams  Redundancy  Lack of coordination across programs  Nonsensical rules about program availability for students  Extreme complexity in administration and implementation of the programs

10. General Education Title Reading or Other Reading Support Special Education Some “Fell’” Through Some “Fell’” Through Heartland Educational Agency

11. Words Per Minute

12. The way that we were coordinating resources was not working

13.  As a teacher when do you feel that students were able to receive “help?”  How collaborative was the process of receiving “help” for a student?  Did students with low skills make good progress?

14.  There is one process to make instructional decisions that are: ◦ Efficient ◦ Proactive ◦ Based on early intervention ◦ Used to match resources to needs ◦ Integrated ◦ Focused on student learning

15.  Teacher ◦ “RTI really advocates for the student. The data really needs to be gathered and assessed. Are the child’s academic needs really being met? Are they making progress? If not, what is the problem and what instructional strategies need to be changed? It seems that the child’s issues becomes one of the team’s and not solely the responsibility of the classroom teacher. Also, in many cases I am sure, some individual students just need some intervention to be successful and NOT special education!” ◦ Nancy Greene, 2 nd grade teacher

16.  Teacher ◦ “RTI is designed to help target a specific deficit in a student’s learning and through collaboration with others design a plan to meet that particular need. This has helped to improve my teaching.” ◦ Jeff Kelley, 4 th grader teacher

17.  Builds a unified (collaborative) system  Identifies students who need help early  It helps students receive instruction that they need

18. Words Per Minute

19.  Reading is a crucial skill not optional  Teach reading early ◦ Days and weeks matter

20.  Poor readers in 4 th grade struggle in literacy in Kindergarten (Torgeson, 2004)  Children who struggle K-3 rarely achieve average reading skills (Torgeson, Rashotte, Alexander, 2001)  Children who cannot read drop out of school  Over 60% percent of people without a high school diploma do not currently have a job that raises them above the poverty line. (underemployed, incarnated, self employed, raising families, ect.) (Bureau of Labor Statistics)  Academic success or failure is strongly related to adaptive functioning as an adult

21.  Is it a skill deficit or developmental lag ? Can’t we wait for them to “bloom?” ◦ Without intervention, kids who are behind stay behind (Juel, 1988; Francis, et al., 1996, Shaywitz, 1999) ◦ Skill deficits can be erased—especially if you catch them early!  Good reading builds reading AND cognitive skills!

22. Independent Reading (4 th grade) %tile Minutes Per Day Words Read Per Year 98 65.0 4,358,000 90 21.1 1,823,000 70 9.6 622,000 50 4.6 282,000 30 1.3 106,000 10 0.1 8,000 2 0.0 0 Adapted from Anderson, Wilson, and Fielding (1988).

23. “... students who get off to a fast start in reading are more likely to read more over the years, and, furthermore, this very act of reading can help children compensate for modest levels of cognitive ability by building their vocabulary and general knowledge. In other words, ability is not the only variable that counts in the development of intellectual functioning. Those who read a lot will enhance their verbal intelligence; that is, reading will make them smarter.” --Cunningham and Stanovich, 1998

24.  Builds a unified (collaborative) system  Identifies students who need help early  It helps students receive instruction that they need

25.  Systematic process to identify student needs  Differentiation of instruction  Seamless “instruction focused” evaluation process

26. RTI: Full Continuum of Support General Education Title Reading & Reading Support, Gifted Ed. Special Education, Gifted Ed. I I I I I I I I all along the continuum! I = Heartland Educational Agency

27. Daisy is part of a class that is part of a school that conducts DIBELS screening three times a year—for EVERY child—and she isn’t doing well Daisy receives highly structured additional instruction—but she doesn’t progress Daisy’s intervention is intensified Does Daisy progress? If not, should she be referred for a special education evaluation? Systematic process

28.  In the current system, which students are most likely to be identified with a learning disability?

29.  Most referrals = placement, but... ◦ If you don’t get referred, you don’t get placed, and  Pre-referral practices reflect poor quality ◦ 80% not guided by a clear defintion ◦ 80% do not have a direct measure in the natural setting ◦ 75% do not compare pre and post intervention data ◦ Do they prevent moving to evaluation? (Reschly)

30. RTI ProcessPre-Referral Process Student in need of assistance identified by screening data Student in need of assistance identified by individual teacher Multi-tiered instruction addresses students need Individual teacher typically responsible for addressing student’s need Students progress is monitored closely through systematic progress monitoring Student’s progress is monitored by the teacher through informal and patchwork assessments Decision about continued need for support is determined by district decision rules Decision about continued need for support is made by team’s beliefs about the student’s progress systematicNot Systematic

31.  Systematic process to identify student needs  Differentiation of instruction

32.  Overall, national longitudinal studies show that more than 17.5 percent of the nation's children-- about 10 million children--will encounter reading problems in the crucial first three years of their schooling" (National Reading Panel Progress Report, 2000).  In a 250 student school: ◦ 200 students will do fine with a good core curriculum ◦ 38 students will need systematic, ongoing specialized instruction ◦ 12 students will need intensive, individualized intervention ◦ We need differentiation

33.  Screening assessment used to identify students needs  Core instruction is differentiated to meet all students needs  Students placed into intervention groups  Students progress is monitored to determine if instruction is working

36. District 1: RTI for 4-5 years District 2: Non RTI Small, rural school district 350 elementary students (PK-5) 470 elementary students (PK-5) Title 1 services 31% students on Free and Reduced Lunch 19% students on Free and Reduced Lunch

37. 3 rd Grade ORF

39.  It is a more collaborative process  It increases achievement of students  It helps all students to receive instruction that they need.

40.  Understand how the RTI system improves our current practices ◦ Improving outcomes for all students  Systematic process  Intervene early  Provide tailored instruction to need ◦ Improving our identification and instruction of students who may have a Specific Learning Disability  Review traditional special education evaluation system  Review RTI evaluation system ◦ Improve parents understanding of their child’s skills

41.  Seamless “instruction focused” evaluation process

42. What’s wrong with them? Vs. What can I do to instruct them effectively?

43. Is the difference big enough?

44.  What did a discrepancy based evaluation tell you about what instruction a student needed to make progress?

45.  Performance on tests that measure psychological processing are biased  No patterns have been found that differentiate LD/not LD

46.  Patterns on psychological processing tests do not predict outcomes  Patterns on psychological processing tests do not lead to treatment

47.  What does a psychological processing based evaluation tell you if it does not... ◦ differentiate LD students from non-LD students or ◦ lead to recommendations that improve achievement?

48. Special education placements tend to stabilize the reading growth of students with reading disabilities rather than accelerate it. (Vaughn, 1998, Moody, 2000) Students who enter special education 2+ years below age mates can be expected to maintain disparity or fall farther behind.

49.  Modal age of identification is 10-12 years old! (Fuchs)  If word reading problems reach a moderate to severe level, interventions cannot bring students to an average level (Torgeson, 2004)

50. Students identified as having LD grew by 150% between 1975 and 2003 Between 1985 and 1995, expenditures for special education nearly doubled – to about $32 Billion dollars From 1996 to 2001, Federal funding nearly tripled from $2.3 to $6.3 billion dollars

51. It’s been costing a lot and not working very well!

52.  Traditional special education evaluations ◦ Do not differentiate LD/non LD students ◦ Do not lead to “treatment” recommendations  Special education outcomes ◦ Historically have not produced significant improved outcomes for students

53.  Why do you REALLY want a student to receive special education services?  How do we get that information?

54. “Responsiveness to Intervention”  Low achievement + Slow progress So What Replaces Discrepancy & Processing Testing?

55.  Evaluation focused on teaching and learning ◦ Information is gathered in classroom context ◦ “Response” is objective and measurable  Process leads to effective plan ◦ Intervention eligibility IEP ◦ Nature and intensity of service is identified ◦ Tells you what the child needs for instruction!

56.  Benchmark assessment data: ◦ Fall ORF: 20 wcpm 80% accuracy ◦ Core instruction: 90 minutes ◦ Intervention: Reading Mastery 30 minutes ◦ Progress Monitoring data: slow progress and low skills ◦ Slide not finished

57. Traditional Assessment Response to Intervention  Focus on what disables the student  Assumes that you need to know what disables the student in order to teach him/her.  Assumes that disabled students need to be taught differently  Assumes that disabled means students need to be taught by someone with special training to teach disabled students  Focus on what enables the student  Assumes that you need to know what skills a student knows in order to enable them to learn  Assumes that students can be enabled to learn by providing more intensive good instruction  Assumes that teachers need to be empowered to use the skills that they have

58.  Understand how the RTI system improves our current practices ◦ Improving outcomes for all students  Systematic process  Intervene early  Provide tailored instruction to need ◦ Improving our identification and instruction of students who may have a Specific Learning Disability  Review traditional special education evaluation system  Review RTI evaluation system ◦ Improve parents understanding of their child’s skills

59. Immediate assistance for the child Involvement and information from the beginning Accountability Common sense Universal Screening Strategic Intervention Intensive Intervention

60. High level of differentiation for ALL students. We don’t have to wait to fail We are proactive rather than reactive

61.  Parent Brochure (CCPS will have one by April)  DIBELS reports shared at conferences  Developmental history given as interventions intensify Teacher Parent

62.  Informed from the beginning  Common assessments  Increases communication with family  Wise use of public funds

63.  Is what we are currently doing working for ALL students?  A SYSTEM that supports all student

64.  Is what we are currently doing working for ALL students?  A SYSTEM that supports all student

65. RTI will help you to: ◦ Know immediately, “Is what we are doing working?” ◦ Know which students need more/different ◦ Know what each student needs ◦ Provide structures to deliver what students need ◦ Raise student achievement ◦ Heartland Educational Agency